From: Matthieu Baerts <matttbe@kernel.org>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>, Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@google.com>
Cc: mptcp@lists.linux.dev, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] tcp: process the 3rd ACK with sk_socket for for TFO/MPTCP
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2024 17:09:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <310de142-e263-4bcd-b499-69e0640de51e@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANn89iKrHnzuHpRn0fi6+2WB_wxi5r-HpZ2jrkhrZEPyhBe0HQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Eric,
On 17/07/2024 16:57, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 12:43 PM Matthieu Baerts (NGI0)
> <matttbe@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> The 'Fixes' commit recently changed the behaviour of TCP by skipping the
>> processing of the 3rd ACK when a sk->sk_socket is set. The goal was to
>> skip tcp_ack_snd_check() in tcp_rcv_state_process() not to send an
>> unnecessary ACK in case of simultaneous connect(). Unfortunately, that
>> had an impact on TFO and MPTCP.
>>
>> I started to look at the impact on MPTCP, because the MPTCP CI found
>> some issues with the MPTCP Packetdrill tests [1]. Then Paolo suggested
>> me to look at the impact on TFO with "plain" TCP.
>>
>> For MPTCP, when receiving the 3rd ACK of a request adding a new path
>> (MP_JOIN), sk->sk_socket will be set, and point to the MPTCP sock that
>> has been created when the MPTCP connection got established before with
>> the first path. The newly added 'goto' will then skip the processing of
>> the segment text (step 7) and not go through tcp_data_queue() where the
>> MPTCP options are validated, and some actions are triggered, e.g.
>> sending the MPJ 4th ACK [2] as demonstrated by the new errors when
>> running a packetdrill test [3] establishing a second subflow.
>>
>> This doesn't fully break MPTCP, mainly the 4th MPJ ACK that will be
>> delayed. Still, we don't want to have this behaviour as it delays the
>> switch to the fully established mode, and invalid MPTCP options in this
>> 3rd ACK will not be caught any more. This modification also affects the
>> MPTCP + TFO feature as well, and being the reason why the selftests
>> started to be unstable the last few days [4].
>>
>> For TFO, the existing 'basic-cookie-not-reqd' test [5] was no longer
>> passing: if the 3rd ACK contains data, these data would no longer be
>> processed, and thus not ACKed.
>>
>> Note that for MPTCP, in case of simultaneous connect(), a fallback to
>> TCP will be done, which seems fine:
>>
>> `../common/defaults.sh`
>>
>> 0 socket(..., SOCK_STREAM|SOCK_NONBLOCK, IPPROTO_MPTCP) = 3
>> +0 connect(3, ..., ...) = -1 EINPROGRESS (Operation now in progress)
>>
>> +0 > S 0:0(0) <mss 1460, sackOK, TS val 100 ecr 0, nop, wscale 8, mpcapable v1 flags[flag_h] nokey>
>> +0 < S 0:0(0) win 1000 <mss 1460, sackOK, TS val 407 ecr 0, nop, wscale 8, mpcapable v1 flags[flag_h] nokey>
>> +0 > S. 0:0(0) ack 1 <mss 1460, sackOK, TS val 330 ecr 0, nop, wscale 8, mpcapable v1 flags[flag_h] nokey>
>> +0 < S. 0:0(0) ack 1 win 65535 <mss 1460, sackOK, TS val 700 ecr 100, nop, wscale 8, mpcapable v1 flags[flag_h] key[skey=2]>
>>
>> +0 write(3, ..., 100) = 100
>> +0 > . 1:1(0) ack 1 <nop, nop, TS val 845707014 ecr 700, nop, nop, sack 0:1>
>> +0 > P. 1:101(100) ack 1 <nop, nop, TS val 845958933 ecr 700>
>>
>> Link: https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/actions/runs/9936227696 [1]
>> Link: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8684#fig_tokens [2]
>> Link: https://github.com/multipath-tcp/packetdrill/blob/mptcp-net-next/gtests/net/mptcp/syscalls/accept.pkt#L28 [3]
>> Link: https://netdev.bots.linux.dev/contest.html?executor=vmksft-mptcp-dbg&test=mptcp-connect-sh [4]
>> Link: https://github.com/google/packetdrill/blob/master/gtests/net/tcp/fastopen/server/basic-cookie-not-reqd.pkt#L21 [5]
>> Fixes: 23e89e8ee7be ("tcp: Don't drop SYN+ACK for simultaneous connect().")
>> Suggested-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Matthieu Baerts (NGI0) <matttbe@kernel.org>
>> ---
>> Notes:
>> - We could also drop this 'goto consume', and send the unnecessary ACK
>> in this simultaneous connect case, which doesn't seem to be a "real"
>> case, more something for fuzzers.
>> - When sending this patch, the 'Fixes' commit is only in net-next, this
>> patch is then on top of net-next. But because net-next will be merged
>> into -net soon -- judging by the PR that has been sent to Linus a few
>> hours ago -- the 'net' prefix is then used.
>> ---
>> net/ipv4/tcp_input.c | 8 +++++++-
>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
>> index ff9ab3d01ced..a89b3ee57d8c 100644
>> --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
>> +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
>> @@ -6820,7 +6820,13 @@ tcp_rcv_state_process(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb)
>> if (sk->sk_shutdown & SEND_SHUTDOWN)
>> tcp_shutdown(sk, SEND_SHUTDOWN);
>>
>> - if (sk->sk_socket)
>> + /* In simult-connect cases, sk_socket will be assigned. But also
>> + * with TFO and MPTCP (MPJ) while they required further
>> + * processing later in tcp_data_queue().
>> + */
>> + if (sk->sk_socket &&
>> + TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->seq == TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->end_seq &&
>> + !sk_is_mptcp(sk))
>> goto consume;
>> break;
>>
>
> Hi Matthieu
>
> I had no time yet to run all our packetdrill tests with Kuniyuki patch
> because of the ongoing netdev conference.
>
> Is it ok for you if we hold your patch for about 5 days ?
Sure, no problem, take your time!
> I would like to make sure we did not miss anything else.
I understand!
> I am CCing Neal, perhaps he can help to expedite the testing part
> while I am busy.
Thank you, no urgency here.
If it's OK with you, I can send a v2 using Kuniyuki's suggestion --
simply limiting the bypass to SYN+ACK only -- because it is simpler and
ready to be sent, but also to please the CI because my v1 was rejected
by the CI because I sent it just before the sync with Linus tree. We can
choose later to pick the v2, the previous one, or a future one.
Cheers,
Matt
--
Sponsored by the NGI0 Core fund.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-17 15:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-07-16 19:43 [PATCH net] tcp: process the 3rd ACK with sk_socket for for TFO/MPTCP Matthieu Baerts (NGI0)
2024-07-17 14:57 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-07-17 15:09 ` Matthieu Baerts [this message]
2024-07-18 9:17 ` Paolo Abeni
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=310de142-e263-4bcd-b499-69e0640de51e@kernel.org \
--to=matttbe@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dsahern@kernel.org \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=kuniyu@amazon.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mptcp@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=ncardwell@google.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox